uk office of public sector information – Creative Commonshttps://creativecommons.org
Join us in building a more vibrant and usable global commons!Wed, 16 Aug 2017 16:30:25 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8https://creativecommons.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/cc-site-icon-150x150.pnguk office of public sector information – Creative Commonshttps://creativecommons.org
3232104997560Public (UK) perception of copyright, public sector information, and CChttps://creativecommons.org/2009/06/09/public-uk-perception-of-copyright-public-sector-information-and-cc/
https://creativecommons.org/2009/06/09/public-uk-perception-of-copyright-public-sector-information-and-cc/#commentsTue, 09 Jun 2009 17:02:06 +0000http://creativecommons.org/?p=15074The UK Office of Public Sector Information has published a report on public understanding of copyright, in particular Crown Copyright, the default status of UK government works … and Creative Commons. It contains interesting findings, though I really wish it had included two additional questions. Among the general (UK) public, 71% agree that government should … Read More "Public (UK) perception of copyright, public sector information, and CC"

]]>The UK Office of Public Sector Information has published a report on public understanding of copyright, in particular Crown Copyright, the default status of UK government works … and Creative Commons. It contains interesting findings, though I really wish it had included two additional questions.

Among the general (UK) public, 71% agree that government should encourage re-use of content it provides, and only 4% disagree.

The survey asked whether people felt encouraged or discouraged from using content when seeing “copyright” alone or alternatives on a web page:

Encouraged

Discouraged

Copyright

15%

70%

Crown Copyright

22%

52%

Click-Use Licence

22%

35%

Read Terms & Conditions

61%

29%

Clearly, copyright discourages use. Of the alternative notices tested in this way, only “Read Terms & Conditions” noticeably encourages use. As the presentation notes, this option is likely to be recognized as non-transactional.

Adding a transaction, potentially monetary, as overhead to copy & paste discourages re-use. You’ll occasionally hear us and advocates of open licensing generally talk about reducing “transaction costs” — see, that’s not just blather! One way of looking at public licenses such as CC licenses is that they make re-use non-transactional — they pre-clear at least certain re-uses.

Unfortunately, the survey did not evaluate a CC license notice in the same manner — whether it encourages or discourages use. 87% of the general public did not recognize the license icon associated with the CC Attribution license. It’s hard to say whether this is good or bad — a small proportion recognizes the image — on the other hand we’re talking about the general public and one specific image.

Hopefully this or a similar survey will be repeated in the UK and elsewhere to see how recognition increases, or does not. Furthermore, future surveys should test not mere image recognition. Typically a license icon is paired with a statement such as “This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.” And of course the icon and text are linked to a “human readable” deed explaining the terms, as well as a “machine readable” annotation so that seeing a license notice on a web page isn’t the only vector for discovering the content as re-usable without a transaction.

Even more unfortunately, they survey did not evaluate whether “public domain” encourages or discourages use.

Overall, it is fantastic that this survey was done and published. Clearly the public wants to be encouraged to make use of its own information and a non-transactional alternative to default copyright is necessary to make that encouragement.